There have been protests by Cherokees and other Native American groups over Elizabeth Warren’s continued insistence that she is Native American despite the complete lack of evidence to sustantiate that claim and substantial evidence that the claim is not true.

Now a Harvard graduate, Margo (Kickingbird) DeLaune (Ed. ’81) and her son, Cole R. DeLaune (Dartmouth ’08), have cirulated a letter to Harvard Native American graduates and to the Harvard Law School faculty, denouncing Elizabeth Warren.

As an enrolled member of the Kiowa Tribe of Oklahoma, 1981 alumna of the Harvard Graduate School of Education, veteran scholastic administrator, and lifelong Democrat, I am profoundly disturbed by the emergence of recent details concerning Harvard and one of its law school’s senior faculty members, Massachusetts senate candidate Elizabeth Warren. Over the course of the past month, facts have come to attention that leave little doubt that the HLS bureaucracy and Professor Warren perpetrated nothing less than ethnic fraud….

I urge fellow Native alumni of Harvard, as well as all American Indians presently associated with any of the University’s schools, to denounce the conduct of HLS and Professor Warren.

Ultimately, however, whether the Professor formally obtained her employment in Cambridge thanks to affirmative action is immaterial. An unethical endeavor does not have to succeed in its objectives in order to warrant objection. Similarly, qualification does not automatically legitimize malfeasance.

Warren has predicated her bid for elected office on an advocacy for the disenfranchised, the proverbial “99 percent.” Consequently, her conduct vis-à-vis a historically marginalized Native community is fundamentally pertinent to the ideological consistency of her campaign platform….

A not-insignificant number of her defenders have attempted to double down by maintaining that most Oklahomans likely have at least a minute amount of Indian DNA. What a poetic illustration of the legacy of colonialism: first, the European entitlement to Native territories, and, now, white entitlement to Native cultural identity sans the conditions that confer meaning on that identity….

Perhaps, in the end, we should appreciate Professor Warren for revealing institutionalized deficiencies at our alma mater that may have otherwise remained unexamined. However, we should nevertheless hold her accountable for the damage she has wrought—by either crassly capitalizing on the plight of the American Indian or indulging in the fetishization of a frequently caricaturized minority group….

I have confirmed that the Open Letter was e-mailed on June 8 to a long list of alumni and faculty, including to Elizabeth Warren.

In an e-mail provided to me by Cole DeLaune, one current Harvard Law professor castigated the DeLaunes for engaging in the “left eating its own”:

Do you really think that this is the issue on which the Massachusetts Senate race should be decided? If not, you should be thinking about the ethics of pressing this issue now…. [in follow up email] If you make your critique, and Professor Warren is elected anyway, you will have advanced your cause, at no expense to anyone. But if Republican money uses your critique to defeat her, you will have set back your cause and the cause of the American middle class. That is what creates the ethical issue for you. I’m sure you have heard the expression that “the left eats its own.”

That a left-wing Harvard Law professor demands that Native Americans stop objecting to Elizabeth Warren’s false claim of Native American heritage in order not to damage her campaign is a perfect example of how political ambition has corrupted principle.

Comments

“If you make your critique, and Professor Warren is elected anyway, you will have advanced your cause, at no expense to anyone. But if Republican money uses your critique to defeat her, you will have set back your cause and the cause of the American middle class.”

Yah. Integrity is often FRIGHTFULLY expensive.

Proof, again, that you can rationalize anything in the name of a Collectivist “good”.

Ethics should not be situational. Something is either right or it is wrong. Now, there are rare occurrences where something wrong must be done regardless of the fact that it is wrong for the greater good.

THIS IS NOT ONE OF THEM.

The fact that a HARVARD LAW PROFESSOR thinks that a candidate for national office should be allowed to LIE (or at best claim without proof and in the face of a veritable MOUNTAIN of evidence) to bolster her election chances should be evidence enough of how far that once venerable institution has fallen.

As we have seen from the Liberals time and again: Ideology ALWAYS trumps ethics. Always.

So if someone on the right were to engage in a truthful and legitimate attack on Romney — this October, you would be OK with that? And you’d condemn any effort to get the person to shut up until after the election?

Of course ethics are situational. Arming the USSR; right or wrong? If it’s 1939, or 1946, it’s wrong; if it’s 1942, it’s right. Ditto for arming the Mujahedeen in the ’80s. And remember the Louisiana campaign when good people were campaigning with the slogan “Vote For the Crook — It’s Important!”.

Thank you, Milhouse, for admitting you are dishonest. As am I. If ethics truly be situational that explains what has happened vis-a-vis modern pregnancies. It all depends, some say. When in truth “it” doesn’t depend on anything other than facts. One is or isn’t pregnant. One is or isn’t ethical. Weak-willed failures such as ourselves can claim situationality till we’re blue in the face, but the truth is we are liars and weasels.

Still rolling on the floor over your contention “good” folks voted for the crooked Kingfish. They were just as crooked as he, just wanted their share of the public pie.

So if someone on the right were to engage in a truthful and legitimate attack on Romney — this October, you would be OK with that? And you’d condemn any effort to get the person to shut up until after the election?

If something this damaging had come out about Romney before he had secured the Republican nomination, would you have brushed it under the carpet, or pushed for a better candidate. Don’t forget that all this information about Warren was public long before her primary race.

The fact that a HARVARD LAW PROFESSOR thinks that a candidate for national office should be allowed to LIE (or at best claim without proof and in the face of a veritable MOUNTAIN of evidence) to bolster her election chances should be evidence enough of how far that once venerable institution has fallen.

What was Harvard’s motto again… oh yeah ‘Veritas’. Maybe their professors need to brush up on their Latin.

A not-insignificant number of her defenders have attempted to double down by maintaining that most Oklahomans likely have at least a minute amount of Indian DNA. What a poetic illustration of the legacy of colonialism: first, the European entitlement to Native territories, and, now, white entitlement to Native cultural identity sans the conditions that confer meaning on that identity….

What an amazing mobilization of the English Language. In all its stereotypical glory, the Okie Indian DNA inside of me (much more than 1/32) is whooping and dancing around a roaring bonfire fire right now.

Question for the Harvard Law School professor who is trying to silence the concerned alums:

What is REALLY being said about Elizabeth Warren by her fellow law school professors, now that it has been revealed how she cheated and lied her way into her tenured HLS job? What are people at the law school really saying to each other about Elizabeth Warren once the office doors are closed?

“Do you really think that this is the issue on which the Massachusetts Senate race should be decided?”

The elected officials in this country face huge ethical challenges each and every day, and we see the deterioration in ethical standards wrought by almost unchecked and limitless power. We are all familiar with the exemption from securities regulations, self-dealing on pay raises, lifetime pensions, platinum health care plans, etc.

Warren’s obvious lack of ethics on the fundamental issue of qualifying as “American Indian” speaks to the very reason why voters should disqualify Warren from their personal consideration as a candidate. She simply cannot be trusted to carry out the office of Senator with the honesty and integrity required of the position.

I hope that the people of Massachusetts realize that it is time that we stop allowing these “ethical compromises” of our elected officials. How disappointing was it that we were failed by our elected officials when Geithner was confirmed. Are you telling me that with the thousands of MBA’s graduating each year we can’t find one to lead Treasury that has properly paid their taxes? Even my mechanic was red in the face after Geithner was still confirmed after it was revealed that he failed to pay his self-employment taxes!

We had a few Democratic candidates for the middle class, whatever that means. It wasn’t like she was the only candidate, we had plenty. The party choose Warren, this is their fault. Don’t blame the Native Americans.

To be pedantically clear, given that we do not know the actual identity of the ‘current law professor’ it is not entirely obvious that the argument offered is truly motivated by political ambitions. It may simply be that one member of HLS, by coming to the public defense of another member, is protecting the virtue of the only ‘tribe’ that really matters. (There’s your heh)

Nor is it in any way known whether this nameless person ever had any principles, or if those principles have ever in any way been corrupted. It is entirely possible this behavior represents a pure expression of the only principle he or she finds valid (i.e. HLS uber alles.)

“Do you really think that this is the issue on which the Massachusetts Senate race should be decided?”

Yes. Exactly, only it isn’t about ethnic heritage, it’s about character. We can not possibly elect people who are “smart” enough for the job. We must elect intelligent people of good character. Problems will arise which will resemble nothing we have ever seen before*. Good people with integrity will remember to be principled in solving the problems. Those who “make shit up” are always going to flailing about as they flounder between one scary-ass solution to another.

*Worse yet, the new problems will “resemble” the old, but will be different, and the old solution won’t work because of the twists which make this a new problem. Applying an old solution to a new problem is a recipe for disaster.

There’s a second fraud, here. Both Warren and the Harvard law professor continue to use their concern for the middle class as trump to excuse their behavior. This is a constant calling card of the “elite,” that their behavior is secondary because, more importantly, they have someone else’s best interests at heart. Here’s a piece of real world information for you: Your behavior matters. There are a great many folks out there who profess to be looking out for others and hold themselves to much higher standards of conduct than you. To compound the problem, here and in too many other cases, your opinion of what’s best is almost always wrong; history books are littered with examples and you folks are adding to the list.

Elizabeth Warren and Michael Bloomberg and the Harvard professor should go away, we middle classers can do a lot better.

This quote bears repeating for the Bloombergs, Warrens and their ilk – who think they know what is best for us:

“Of all tyrannies, a tyranny sincerely exercised for the good of its victims may be the most oppressive. It would be better to live under robber barons than under omnipotent moral busybodies. The robber baron’s cruelt…y may sometimes sleep, his cupidity may at some point be satiated; but those who torment us for our own good will torment us without end for they do so with the approval of their own conscience.”
C. S. Lewis

You can’t read a single page of comments at Kos or the Huffington Post without running across a liberal moaning about the middle class voting “against their own best interests”. They blithely assume that all the claptrap that left wing intellectuals believe is self-evidently and unarguably in the best interest of everyone under a certain income level. It is one of the most deluded examples of begging the question I have ever seen in my life.

I’m especially curious about the left-wing law professor. If the left-wing law professor spoke out publicly in criticism, I could respect him or her for disagreeing with alums about the importance of these issues to the Senate race. What I’m struck by if that the professor privately wrote in what could be construed as an effort to stifle public debate on such issues. The identity of the professor does seem like an issue of public importance. The professor has injected himself or herself into a matter of considerable public controversy, and ought to be publicly accountable for his or her actions. Quite possibly many in Massachusetts will agree with the professor. Regardless of what one might think of the professor, it would seem that the best move for the professor is to come forward publicly at this juncture, to control the message being delivered, rather than wait and be involuntarily outed at some point.

Do you really think that this is the issue on which the Massachusetts Senate race should be decided?

Yes. Absolutely.

How does one advance a ’cause’, any cause, when one lies about something so basic as one’s own identity? What cause is so dear, so important, that we would tolerate as a United States Senator a person who would defraud a system that was designed to help people?

Prof. Warren stole from the system. She denied another minority person a chance to advance at Penn and Harvard so that she, blue eyes and blond hair, could have the job.

She lied about her identity to advance her career. Did she not have enough confidence in who she was to make her career on her own? Wait, wait, we know the answer to that.

Must we know accept a liar for the sake of a ’cause’? For ‘Middle America’? For the ‘people’?

It’s rather like saying that Mary Jo Kopechne should be proud of what Ted Kennedy accomplished on behalf of women, work that he would not have been able to do had he been turned out of the Senate. Except, of course, that there were liberals who actually argued that. Same state as it turns out.

Ms. and Mr. DeLaune get it exactly right: just as white Americans expropriated the land and heritage of native Americans these past four centuries for their own purposes, now Prof. Warren expropriates their identity for her own purpose.

How much more indignity shall Prof. Warren heap upon native Americans?

Remember how this whole thing with Warren started? With her citing her ancestry as reported by her family, and recollections of an ancestor’s high cheekbones as evidence of American Indian lineage?

Well, the Cherokee are not the only racial sub-type known for high cheekbones. Another group – with far larger numbers – is the Nordics, people from nothern Europe. Swedes, Norwegians, et al.

The Cherokee nation was relocated to Oklahoma, of course, where Warren was born and raised. Less known is that one of the major ethnic groups of Americans to settle Oklahoma was… northern Europeans.

Sans documentation of her putative Cherokee ancestry, we’ll leave it to the individual to decide whether Warren looks more like an American of northern European descent or a Cherokee.

————————–

Incidentally, Mrs. Hawkins is a registered citizen of the Cherokee nation. Her maternal great grandmother is listed on the original Dawes Roll, and her maternal grandmother and mother were also registered members of the Cherokee. Mrs. Hawkins conducts a yearly public health conference for NC nursing students at the Cherokee (eastern band) headquarters here in NC.

She is fairly blase about people falsely claiming Cherokee ancestry, joking that 99% of North Carolinians do so, but the Warren thing specifically incenses her. She compares it to people who reap profit of some sort from false claims of being war veterans, or people who take donations based on false claims of being sick and needing help.

She compares it to people who reap profit of some sort from false claims of being war veterans, or people who take donations based on false claims of being sick and needing help.

Maybe I’m biased, but this statement kind of bothers me. Is this a sort of equivocation between the benefits Veterans receive and the entitlements Native Americans receive? Because I don’t really see the parallel.

“just because you wish ever so much for it to be a lie all you and that prof (but don’t you teatards hate those “eye-liete Haarvaard lie-beral college edumacated socialists? or is that just when they disagree with you?) you neglect to provide proof of your rumors.”

“What a poetic illustration of the legacy of colonialism: first, the European entitlement to Native territories, and, now, white entitlement to Native cultural identity sans the conditions that confer meaning on that identity.”

Great line, from a fantastic letter.

Maybe out this mess, two good things can come: first, the “ethnic” rent-seeking behavior encouraged by the Democrat party for generations can be enough exposed for the corruption it truly is that Americans (broadly speaking, and beyond the conservative majority) will become disgusted by it, and two; the raw deal Indians get from the BIA will (again) shock and disgust America to the point that Indians can be freed from the government plantation, paid the long delayed payments they were promised and become able to organize their own lives as they see fit. Obviously, this scandal will hve to expand and grow before the BIA stuff, and the general raw deal Native Americans get today from their federal plantaiton masters, is exposed but one can hope. Every American should be free, and Native Americans are not.

[…] » Native American Harvard alumna and lifelong Dem accuses Elizabeth Warren of “ethnic fraud” &#… In an e-mail provided to me by Cole DeLaune, one current Harvard Law professor castigated the DeLaunes for engaging in the “left eating its own”: Do you really think that this is the issue on which the Massachusetts Senate race should be decided? If not, you should be thinking about the ethics of pressing this issue now…. [in follow up email] If you make your critique, and Professor Warren is elected anyway, you will have advanced your cause, at no expense to anyone. But if Republican money uses your critique to defeat her, you will have set back your cause and the cause of the American middle class. That is what creates the ethical issue for you. I’m sure you have heard the expression that “the left eats its own.” […]